I checked a few - YTD
FFRHX -9.97% (rates aren’t rising)
VWEHX -7.77% High yield
CIOZX -11.27%
NEFZX -11.22% ( listed as multi sector, someone didn’t get the memo)
Multi sector funds
FADMX -6.1%
PONAX -6.37%
NSTLX -6.46%

If you believe in the benefits of diversification, PSILX is a fine choice. It has low expenses for an international fund, above average returns and exposure to almost all segments of foreign markets.

Good risk/reward profile, there on PSILX. Look at the 10-year: Avg/High.

T Rowe use to have some tools I used, such as portfolio analysis with a Stock Overlap feature. Do they still have that?
I have tried logging on but they do not recognize me nor can I find a way to create a new account. I have some T Rowe funds but thru Fidelity.

They still provide some Morningstar tools. Since I have an account I'm not going to attempt to reregister, but it looks like this page might be what you're looking for:
Register For The Site
https://www3.troweprice.com/aaweb1/accountAccess/publicBenefitsOfRegistration.do

Part 4 link: https://fiprofessor.com/2019/07/27/safe-withdrawal-rates-guide-part-4-perpetual-rates.html

I own PRIDX. ... It fell hard with coronavirus. But it's coming back, down -13% now, ytd. Down to 3 stars, but still with a silver decoration. ... Top 15% among peers, ytd. Not a great showing compared to peers LAST year, but still very good indeed.

For a few months, I've been promising myself to make a post on being careful about what numbers do and don't represent (i.e. look behind the numbers). Figures like ERs, duration, performance. One of these days.
Meanwhile, to deconstruct these numbers and ratings a bit:
PRIDX outperformed both its benchmark and its category 2019 Q4, 2020 Q1 and YTD, so while it fell hard with coronavirus, on a relative basis it performed admirably. It's the whole market that has come back (to some extent), and PRIDX has more or less just kept up its rate of outperformance.
So why the 3 stars? M* continues to rate its risk as below average (as of March 31) for 3 years, 5 years, and 10 years. Also as of March 31, M* rates 3/5/10 year performance as average, above average, average.
http://performance.morningstar.com/fund/performance-return.action?t=PRIDX&region=usa&culture=en-US
Generally, above average return with below average risk gets a fund into, or close to a 4 star rating. Thus, as of March 31, PRIDX was rated 4 stars for the five year period (above average performance), but 3 stars for the three and ten year periods.
The overall star rating is a weighted average: 3 years (20%), 5 years (30%), and 10 years (50%). So PRIDX gets 3 stars.
https://www.morningstar.com/content/dam/marketing/shared/research/methodology/771945_Morningstar_Rating_for_Funds_Methodology.pdf
Now take a look at the 3/5/10 performance figures. To be rated above average, a fund must be in the top 32.5% of its category (but not in the top 10%).
PRIDX came close to above average performance, but didn't make it over 3 years (38th percentile) or 10 years (33rd percentile). Shift that 10 year performance a little and the 10 year star rating should move up to 4 stars, bringing the overall weighted average rating also up to four stars.
It looks like this has happened. Take performance rankings through today (April 26). 10 year moves up to 27th percentile, 5 year drops slightly from 14th to 17th percentile, and 3 year moves up to 29th percentile. All above average performances.
So one should expect the star rating to move back to 4 stars when it's recalculated unless the fund stumbles in the interim.
All of this goes to show that even when looking at long term performance, what a fund has done lately can have a significant impact.
The poor showing last year? Over the whole year it underperformed its category by 3.18% where the average gain was 27.78%. Not a great showing, but not as bad as its 71st percentile would superficially suggest. Also, it never had a really bad quarter; it just chugged along, trailing by as much as 1.18% in Q3 and as little as 0.25% in Q4. Not great, but fairly consistent and nothing obvious to get concerned about.

Thank you for the link. Have to read more.

For example a portfolio of 100% PRWCX would have a "Safe Withdrawal Rate" of 10% and a "Safe Perpetual Withdrawal Rate" of 5.6%. The rule of thumb for a Safe Perpetual Withdrawal Rate is 4% according to the Trinity Study (linked below).

This article provides a useful look at the current situation and possible future trends. (Some may find it useful to glide around the more dystopian/dramatic references in the article.) Here are a few excerpts:

The manufacturing sector hasn't completely rolled over yet, but the services sector simply ceased to exist starting late last month.....The message is clear: Main Street isn't just hurting, it is disappearing in a very literal sense. As Atlanta Fed boss Raphael Bostic warned earlier this month, "May is going to loom large, in terms of the transition of concern from this being a liquidity issue… to this perhaps translating and transferring into a solvency issue, and whether companies can exist at all."

(...from Homebase, a scheduling and time tracking tool used by more than 100,000 local businesses covering 1 million hourly employees.)

.
.

Deutsche Bank rolled up the fiscal and monetary support programs announced and implemented in the US and Europe into a single "bailout" figure. The sheer size of the COVID-19 response necessitated a log scale (on the left axis) in order to help "better identify the earlier bailouts and get a rough feel visually for the numbers," as the bank put it. ....."Obviously we won’t know how much will be used until much further down the road," the bank cautioned, in the course of presenting the numbers and accompanying visuals.

....policymakers have been deliberately suppressing volatility, compressing risk premia, tamping down credit spreads and keeping the market wide-open for borrowers for the better part of a decade....
Deutsche Bank's George Saravelos.....At the extreme, central banks could become permanent command economy agents administering equity and credit prices, aggressively subduing financial shocks. With unlimited capacity to print money, central banks have unlimited capacity to intervene in asset markets too. Put simply, a central bank that pegs bond, credit and equity markets is highly likely to stabilize portfolio flows as well.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4340027-dystopia-now

I believe that, unlike many cash back cards, Fido credit card now sends the tax form for these 2%, so it is not 2% cash back (no taxes, just cash return), but 2% minus taxes.

This has been settled law for decades now. Here's a CNBC page discussing whether rewards are taxable.
https://www.cnbc.com/select/are-credit-card-rewards-taxable/
As it states, rewards (whether points, cash, or miles) are not taxable so long as you had to spend something to receive them. So a signing bonus that did not require a min spend would be taxable, but that's about the only exception. (Here's Fidelity's $100 sign up bonus promotion that requires spending $1,000 in the first 90 days.)
Fidelity does have an option to contribute the rewards to an IRA account. In that case, the reward is considered a contribution. That both reduces the amount of additional money you can contribute to the IRA and permits you to take a deduction for the contribution. Of course, as Fidelity points out, if you are not eligible to make that contribution, then the amount is subject to an excise tax.
For completeness, I just checked the 2019 Fidelity Combined 1099 for someone I'm helping with taxes. There is no amount entered for cash back from the card. The only entries in these 1099s are for divs received from funds.
The rules about combining credit card rebates with IRAs could lead one to think that the rewards were taxable. Perhaps this is what you were thinking of, or was there something else?

Using tools like Portfolio Visualizer (click on
metrics tab) an investor can review historical data on the safe withdrawal rate of their portfolio. For example a portfolio of 100% PRWCX would have a "Safe Withdrawal Rate" of 10% and a "Safe Perpetual Withdrawal Rate" of 5.6%. The rule of thumb for a Safe Perpetual Withdrawal Rate is 4% according to the Trinity Study (linked below).
Understanding these concepts is an important element of "safely" deriving a portion of one's income in retirement over a time frame of 30 - 50 years.
From the Article:

First, I wanted to see how this was working with recent stock market returns. The original study was only covering years up to 1995. I wanted to have more recent data. I wanted to make sure that the results were holding with more recent stock market behavior. So this simulation will cover returns until the end of 2019!
Secondly, the original study was only covering up to thirty years of retirement. I wanted to be sure that the portfolio can sustain withdrawals for much more extended periods. For people retiring early, I think that 50 years is not unreasonable.

The Trinity Study:
https://thepoorswiss.com/trinity-study/
The Update to the Trinity Study for 2020:
https://thepoorswiss.com/updated-trinity-study/
Here's a 4 Part Series on the Topic.
Part 1:
safe-withdrawal-rates-guide-part-1-background.html
Part 2:
https://fiprofessor.com/2019/07/14/safe-withdrawal-rates-guide-part-2-enough-data.html
Part 3:
https://fiprofessor.com/2019/07/21/safe-withdrawal-rates-guide-part-3-more-bootstrapping.html
Part 4:
https://fiprofessor.com/2019/07/27/safe-withdrawal-rates-guide-part-4-perpetual-rates.html

Hi guys. Another asset allocation fund that I like ... but, do not own is SFAAX. They use to be more transparent with posting their positioning but now they just list their baseline asset allocation as a 40/60 (bond/stock) portfolio. However, I know it gets jockeyed from time to time based upon the manager's read on the makret. I have learned that its stock allocation can range from a low of 45% upwards to a high of 75% while its bond allocation can range from a low of 25% to a high of 55%. It is another fund that has performed well in this recent stock market downdraft. In checking it's performance I'm finding that it is down year to date by -2.65% with a ten year average total return of +9.39% as of 4/24/2020. And, as I write, it is off it's 52 week high by 6.68%. In comparison, the S&P 500 Index is off its 52 week high by 16.2% with a ten year average return of around 11.0%. With this, the fund does employ and offer some downside risk measures while providing excellent returns for an asset allocation fund.
MFO list this as a moderate asset allocation fund with a risk level rating of 3 and with a performance rating of 5. And, yes it made MFO's Honor Roll.
Anybody on the board own this fund? If so ... perhaps, you would be willing to report its positioning from its latest shareholder report? And, make some additional comments. I'd be most interested in learning of your comments and thoughts.

+1.

I own PRIDX. Almost all my stuff is with TRP. "International Discovery." Smid-caps. M* rates it as mostly mid-cap growth. It fell hard with coronavirus. But it's coming back, down -13% now, ytd. Down to 3 stars, but still with a silver decoration. Turnover is 26% in the portfolio. I don't take Morningstar as gospel, but it's what I see most of. You get accustomed to navigating a particular website. Top 15% among peers, ytd. Not a great showing compared to peers LAST year, but still very good indeed. Upside capture is less than the 100 you'd like to see (or better,) but downside-capture is 85, and that's better than peers--- at least as Morningstar has them grouped. I'm sticking with it, but it's just 5.5% of portfolio. My TOTAL ex-USA stocks = only 7% now.
Here's the US NEWS magazine's TRP listing and ranking of TRP funds:
https://money.usnews.com/funds/t-rowe-price

If you have a Vanguard account, you can purchase the CTFAX institutional version COTZX (lower er / no 12b-1 fee).

Previously referenced here:
Searches
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/search?Search=7twelve
https://www.google.com/search?q=site:bogleheads.org+7twelve
https://www.google.com/search?&q=israelsen+"7twelve"
Review
https://www.portfolioeinstein.com/craig-israelsens-7twelve-portfolio/
Book Review [SSRN: Free Registration]
From: Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Volume 23, Issue 1 2012
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2443606

Howdy,
A quick look for bond returns since March 20, when the bond markets were having problems.
As bonds in one form or another are part of many portfolios, the below numbers may provide an overview on the actions of some of your holdings.

I place the below again from a March 20 post.
A few views from bondland:
DAY(March 20) / WEEK / YTD
--- MINT = -1% / -3.6% / -4.1% (Pimco Enhanced short maturity)
--- SHY = +.27% /+.24% / +2.5% (1-3 yr bills)
--- IEI = +1.2% /+.7% /+5.2% (3-7 yr notes)
--- IEF = +2.6% /+1.5% /+8.4% (7-10 yr notes)
--- TLT = +7.5% / +3.6% /+18.1% (20+ Yr UST Bond
--- EDV = +7.15% / -.23% / +19.8% (Vanguard extended duration gov't)
--- ZROZ = +8.93% /+2.27% /+22.3% (UST., AAA, long duration zero coupon bonds)
***Other:
--- HYG = -2.24% / -12.9 / -20% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- LQD = +1.6% / -13.25% / -16.2% (corp. bonds, various quality)
--- LTPZ = +12.3% /+4.3% / +3.5% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds
I had also previously noted that EDV, TLT and ZROZ can be very hot potatoes to manage and require a close watch and what may adjust their performance directions.
Below, week ending April 24 with YTD only, which you may compare to March 20 YTD, above:
These below are AAA credit, except Other.
--- MINT = - .57%
--- SHY = + 2.8%
--- IEI = + 6.5%
--- IEF = +11.2%
--- TLT = +26.7%
--- EDV = +36%
--- ZROZ = +39.8%
***Other:
--- HYG = -9.7% (high yield bonds, proxy ETF)
--- LQD = +2.3% (corp. bonds, various quality)
--- LTPZ = +19.6% (UST, long duration TIPs bonds
Take care,
Catch

At Fidelity:
PTTAX has no fees but min is $1000.
PTTNA has a fee of $49.95 to purchase
PTTRX has one million min.
None is a good choice for most investors.
At Schwab
PTTAX has no fees but min is $100.
PTTNA not available
PTTRX has one million min and a fee of $49.95.
You just proved my point.
Loomis vs Pimco. In the last several years Loomis funds never made my final 5 top funds but Pimco funds many times.
One example among many: Just several weeks ago we discussed bond funds on M*. One of the funds was CBPSX/SAMFX(instit). At Fidelity, CBPSX has $2500 min no fees, SAMFX $100K min + fee=49.95. At Schwab, CBPSX has $1000 min no fees, SAMFX has no fees + only $100 min.
I can give many others and especially funds I traded.
Many times I can find new funds at Schwab several months before they are available at Fidelity
Sure, Fidelity may have several choices that Schwab doesn't but Schwab is hands-down better.
==============
I actually tried Fidelity ATM several years ago at Europe and they changed me the 1% fee while Schwab didn't
==============
Just 2 months ago I received a cash reward of $300 when I transferred just over $100K to Schwab, you are correct, you will not find it but if you ask you will get it. I had to submit a proof that another broker does it. Etrade does (link). This offer used to be for IRAs too. Over the years I have tried many times at both and again Schwab reps worked with me much better.
==============
Fidelity is better at
1) Adding to Inst fund for only $5 (many don't know this choice)
2) You can sell mutual funds after 60 days without a fee, at Schwab it's 90 days.
3) 2% cash back credit card.
I beat number 1,2 by buying only Instit shares and I don't pay for that.
I use the Fidelity credit card. You can find 2% elsewhere but I like the convenience.
The most annoying for me at Fidelity is selling and buying funds on the same day and the inability to buy a stock/ETF when your account is invested completely in mutual funds.
Lastly, both Fidelity and Schwab are the top 2 for most investors but for my needs, Schwab is much better. I find Fidelity more rigid than Schwab.

"All Pimco Instit shares have one million min at Fido but just $100K at Schwab. This means that for every $100K you will save $250 at Schwab per year"
PIMCO Total Return Fund costs by share class (from summary prospectus):
PTTAX (Class A) : 1.05%
PTTNX (Class I-3):0.86%
PTTRX (InstClass):0.71%
No pairwise combo adds up to a $250/$100K per year difference.
"Trust but verify" works best when figures are actual and not theoretical based on what one thinks they ought to be. Often the ERs of retail and institutional shares differ by precisely 0.25% due to a 12b-1 fee on the retail shares. But unlike many fund families, PIMCO also charges a higher management fee on its retail shares.
Fidelity will sell you PTTNX, so the difference on a $100K investment comes to $150/year (0.86% ER vs 0.71% ER), not $250. Still, that's real money, right? Absolutely, if one wants to invest $100K or more.
Suppose one wants to invest "just" $25K. At Vanguard, one could buy the institutional share class and save $85/year over buying the retail shares at Schwab. Or one could buy the I-3 shares at Fidelity and save $37.50/year over buying the retail shares at Schwab.
In fact, one doesn't have to pony up even that much at Fidelity, where there's no min on PTTNX.

@bee can you please how you able to invest our HSA in BRUFX???

I simply set up an HSA account with Bruce Fund...I believe this was a paper application through the mail. I use my bank accounts billpay service to make month contributions electronically.
There website is spartan, but functions simply. No cash position. I am always invested 100% in BRUFX. I will eventually open another HSA with Fidelity where I can widen my fund choices and hold near cash.
I have done withdrawals from BRUFX for medical reimbursements, but I do this very in frequently. I consider the fund my Long Term Care policy which will hopefully fund / offset much of my healthcare costs in retirement.

Hi guys,
This week I thought I'd post the daily movement of the barometer in this way you might come to a better understanding of what went on in the market this past week in relation to stock market volatility along with the brometer's daily movement.
In review, last Friday's barometer reading was 143 with the S&P 500 Index closing at a valuation of 2875 indicating that the Index was overvalued. On Monday, the Index closed with a valuation of 2823 which produced a barometer reading of 150 indicating that the Index was at fair value on the barometer's scale. On Tuesday, the Index pulled back again closing at 2737 which produced a barometer reading of 163 indicating that the Index was now oversold based upon the metrics of the barometer. On Wednesday, the Index gained a little lost ground and closed with a reading of 2799 which produced a fair value reading on the barometer's scale at 150. Thrusday, the Index closed the day with a valuation of 2798; and, with this, there was not much that changed with the barometer's reading which remained at 150 and fair value. On Friday the Index moved upward and closed with a reading of 2837 whcih produced a barometer reading of 144 indicating that the Index had moved back into an overvalued reading of the barometer's scale. Energy was the only sector that was positive for the week and was up +1.67%. For the week the S&P 500 Index lost -1.3%.
If I had just posted the week ending barometer readings this week one could have assumed that not much took place during the week ... whereas ... a lot did. On a weekly basis the barometer reading went from a Friday to Friday close from 143 to 144. But, to really understand what actually went on you have to follow the Index's daily movement which is detailed in the above paragraph.
My three best performing funds for the week were all found in the growth area of my portfolio. They were KAUAX +2.43% ... AOFAX +2.42% ... and, FKASX +2.15%.
Thanks for stopping by and reading.
Take care ... be safe ... and, I wish all ... "Good Investing."
Old_Skeet

Are there any global allocation funds you would add to what has been suggested

RPGAX TRP. 30% fixed. 26 US stocks. 30 non-US stocks. 11 "other." 3 cash
Down -11.29% YTD, still.
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/rpgax/portfolio